Cisco Duo Reviews

My current use cases for Cisco Duo involve a pool of clients where most of our clients use Cisco Duo for MFA to access their online environments, whether it be a VPN connection back to their office or to Azure, where they usually have Cisco Duo protection on it. In our own environment, we also use Cisco Duo to access our company resources through a portal that is protected by Cisco Duo.

I am using the MFA component of Cisco Duo, which I think is the main component, along with all the granular functionalities such as bypass codes. We sync to Active Directory, and we utilize geofencing when our clients are traveling, allowing us to lift the geofencing off a certain account to grant them access. We do not really use the reporting features very much, only when we are troubleshooting to see why someone is unable to access their resources.

What I appreciate the most about Cisco Duo is the advanced license, which incorporates regional security such as geofencing, and I think that is quite valuable to have included. The bypass codes are also very useful from an administration point of view.

I think the integration of identity security into Cisco Duo's IAM solution is highly beneficial against modern threats, as it is integrated with many technologies and service providers to cover MFA, and it is quick and easy to set up.

I saw the benefits of Cisco Duo immediately after deployment; we started seeing spoofing attempts where the MFA request was not approved because the user was unaware of someone logging in. Clients I implemented Cisco Duo at immediately feel more confident in their security environment, and we can see a lot of illegal attempts to get in, giving me faith in the product.

One downside of Cisco Duo is the expense, as there are clients that can afford only the basic package, which does not include Geo-fencing, leaving them unable to pay for the more expensive level, which I do not feel justifies the double price of that upper tier version. That is about the only thing I would change, otherwise, it is a wonderful product, and I have interacted with their support quite often with no issues.

I have been using Cisco Duo in my career overall for about three years.

I have never seen any lagging, crashing, or downtime with Cisco Duo; I can definitely say we have not had any Cisco Duo outages across all the companies I have worked for that utilize Cisco Duo.

Cisco Duo is very scalable; with just a few clicks in the admin portal, I can add new portals and systems to cover with authentication, and it is almost too easy.

I have contacted Cisco technical support a few times regarding technical matters, including transferring a client from their portal to our company portal, which was resolved almost instantly. I also got assistance for a trial license request from a client considering the more expensive license.

I would give Cisco Duo's support a nine out of ten, as there was one instance where I had to wait a bit to receive assistance, but that was just that one time.

I have used WatchGuard AuthPoint, the WatchGuard variation of an MFA product that is similar to Cisco Duo.

I definitely prefer Cisco Duo for the ease of configuration and how simple it is to use, while the WatchGuard counterpart is extremely difficult and technical to configure and set up.

The initial deployment of Cisco Duo was difficult because I had never used it before, and I had to set up a Cisco Duo AuthProxy server in a complicated environment. However, I reached out to Cisco Duo support, and their online documentation was of great help, so I managed to get it up and running, but it was not easy.

The first full setup of Cisco Duo took me about an entire afternoon, mainly due to configuring the AuthProxy component, and that was only after joining a company for about two weeks, which contributed to the learning curve. Cisco Duo, including the AuthProxy and the online portal portion, probably took two hours.

Cisco Duo does not require maintenance on my end if set up correctly; linking it to Active Directory or something similar means no regular maintenance is needed. We only need to generate bypass codes when users struggle or when we adjust profiles for clients traveling.

I have not utilized the end-to-end phishing resistance feature of Cisco Duo to its full extent.

I have noticed an increase in attempts to access resources illegitimately in my organization; we have two MFA products, Cisco Duo and WatchGuard, and in the logs, we see a lot of attempts. I do not know if that is an uptick in attempts, but there are definitely a lot of attempts going about.

I give this review a rating of ten out of ten.

My main use cases for Cisco Duo are for push notifications for new users or if their phone is unable to receive Duo push notifications. I sync it through Active Directory and usually assist users trying to get back into the VPN.

I use Cisco Duo's push notification method, which makes it easier and faster because if a person is having issues with their phones or is unable to log in with the VPN or with a Duo push notification, it is a quick sync and then I am able to assist or restart their phone, after which the push notification goes through to their actual phone number.

The features of Cisco Duo that I appreciate the most are the ease of access and usability. It is really easy to use. I can go into the device and access the user's information. It syncs with Active Directory and syncs with many users' logins, and as an admin, I can easily navigate through it all.

I assess the impact of Cisco Duo's dashboards on identifying security vulnerabilities as very helpful because it sends notifications in the portal if there are any issues or if any person has not been authenticated. It also sends alerts for any phones that are not up to code with iOS, indicating if they need to upgrade.

Cisco Duo's trusted endpoint device capabilities have helped improve my organization's security policies because with the Duo notification, particularly with VPN, any user trying to get in with the VPN must go through the Duo push notification. This sends two-factor or multi-factor authentication, which really helps with our security.

Cisco Duo's adaptive authentication feature helps overall because I can log in with my admin account. If any user has an issue with it, I can sync them through Active Directory normally and then change their settings if they get a new phone, which is usually the issue with new users. The resync process is overall very easy.

Examples of how these features have benefited my organization include that end users are happy and I am happy because I do not have to constantly monitor it every single day. The overall capability of what it has is valuable, and I know my end users enjoy it as well.

In terms of how Cisco Duo can be improved, I do not have any issues off the top of my head. I have not faced an issue in a couple of years with Cisco Duo at all.

I have been using Cisco Duo for two years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Duo as outstanding because I have not had any downtime and they always notify me if there is any performance maintenance they have to do. It is usually scheduled after hours so we are not affected. Cisco Duo is always performing maintenance after hours and they send us a notification a week in advance saying they are going to work on it, which I appreciate.

I find that Cisco Duo scales with the growing needs of my organization exactly as we need.

We have expanded usage of Cisco Duo throughout South Carolina and we are trying to expand into North Carolina.

I evaluate customer service and technical support for Cisco Duo as a 10 out of 10. I had a positive experience when we had a case about four months ago. Active Directory was not syncing with a user for some reason. I had to speak with technical support and they walked me through everything I needed to do with Cisco Duo, including going into the server and rebooting it. They answered all of my questions and the user was happy. Overall, everything went well.

Prior to adopting Cisco Duo, I remember there was something we had before, but I am drawing a blank. I cannot remember what it was.

I describe my experience with deploying Cisco Duo as very efficient because anytime a new user came in, it synced with Active Directory very quickly. I did not have to wait a day, two days, or three days for it to sync. It was immediate. I was able to put in all their information needed and send the notification and sync them. It was overall a very easy process and Cisco Duo made it very simple to sync new users.

I was not part of the solutions considered before selecting Cisco Duo. When I started, they already had Cisco Duo Push. I can see why they selected Cisco Duo Push.

I rate Cisco Duo overall as a 10 out of 10 and my advice to other organizations considering Cisco Duo is to implement it.

I was not part of the pricing, setup costs, and licensing decisions, but I know the person who was involved, and they did not have any issue with it. I give this review an overall rating of 10.

My main use case for Cisco Duo is identity and access management or verification, authentications, resetting passwords, self-service password reset, and managing and improving the security layer of the environment.

I use Cisco Duo for access management or verification, for example, when resetting the password for a client and we need to verify them, we could send them a reactivation text or we can send them a Duo Push. That's how we follow the process.

Other scenarios with Cisco Duo include Duo reactivation where people change their device and receive a new one. Then we have to get it onboarded and we send the reactivation text. They can activate with a single click.

The best features Cisco Duo offers and which stand out to me is Duo Push because it's the convenient option where we can just send a Duo Push and the person can just approve the push and then right away they can get in, saving the time to type in the password.

The convenience of Cisco Duo has impacted my workflow and my clients by providing ease of access, enhanced security, reduced risk, and reducing phishing and spam instances.

I would add that the integration among different applications and partner applications, such as Microsoft and other tenants, which includes Cisco Duo sitting as an agent or an intermediary between both the APIs, is a vital feature.

Cisco Duo has positively impacted my organization by reducing the metrics taken to resolve the issue. If the person can reset a password using the self-service password reset where they can verify using a Duo Push, it saves them time because they can do that in 10 minutes. When we need to do it on the domain controller and we need to sync over the password with the domain, it could take more than 30 minutes. We are definitely saving out of 30 minutes here.

I believe Cisco Duo needs to be improved on the delay process because there is a delay when we send a Duo Push or when we are signing into any applications. We can work on making it faster and speed this up. That's the part we need to work on, and on the outages, instances where we face issues with Cisco Duo and they are disabled, and systems are not working.

While the user interface of Cisco Duo is good and does not need to improve as it is quite user friendly, we do need to improve on the API because that is causing a delay in the process of revoking the tokens. The tokens are being sent a little late. Sometimes it has happened with me on multiple clients.

I have been using the solution for about four years.

In my experience, Cisco Duo is stable but not agile and not optimized, as there are delays when using the application and delays with APIs.

The customer support for Cisco Duo is great.

My organization used Microsoft Authenticator before Cisco Duo, and I switched because it was an option. I switched from Microsoft Authenticator to Cisco Duo because the GCP one is on Microsoft Azure.

Looking back at my initial investment in Cisco Duo versus the total value it has delivered over time, I see that it has paid more than what we invested, so we are getting a good return and a good service with improved security.

My advice to others looking into using Cisco Duo is that they can go for the product. I would rate this product a 9.

I mainly help customers to setup Cisco Duo for multi-factor authentication.

Duo significantly increases phishing resistance for application access. So the main benefit is improved security.

Passwordless authentication - This is the future of secure access. By eliminating passwords entirely through FIDO2/WebAuthn, Duo removes the primary attack vector for credential theft while also simplifying the login experience for users.

Cisco Duo is technically excellent, but the main challenge is market positioning rather than product capability. Microsoft Authenticator comes bundled with Microsoft 365 at no additional cost, so many organizations default to that solution rather than purchasing Duo as a standalone product.

I have been using Cisco Duo for approximately one and a half years.

Cisco Duo is very stable. I have never experienced major outages or service disruptions. The product itself is reliable - any minor issues we've encountered were typically user configuration errors rather than platform problems.

The scalability is excellent. Being cloud-based, Duo handles any user count without infrastructure concerns. We've scaled it across multiple customers without performance issues.

I have no experience with their support - I have never encountered issues that required contacting Cisco. The product documentation and admin portal have been sufficient

Yes, I used Microsoft Authenticator but only as a end user. In my opinion, Duo is simpler and more intuitive. From an admin perspective, I can't give a review.

The initial setup is straightforward and fast. Duo's phased rollout approach shows they understand real-world deployment challenges. Overall, it's very easy to implement.

My company is a Cisco Duo reseller and partner, so we perform the deployments ourselves for our clients rather than using external integrators or consultants.

I don't have quantifiable ROI data. The value is primarily in risk mitigation - preventing phishing and credential theft. The cost of a single breach would far exceed the investment in Duo. I cannot speak to operational cost savings like reduced password reset tickets.

The pricing is fair and straightforward - per-user licensing makes budgeting simple. Setup is easy and intuitive. The licensing tiers are well-structured and easy to understand.

9 out of 10. Duo is technically excellent - stable, feature-rich, with outstanding passwordless capabilities and straightforward deployment.

My advice: Take advantage of the free tier (up to 10 users) and 30-day trial to test it in your environment.

Cisco Duo is used for multi-factor authentication for VPN users and remote access users. I only use the MFA feature of Cisco Duo, and the application is excellent. The dashboards and everything about managing the product is clean and intuitive.

Cisco Duo benefits the company by increasing the security footprint, and it is easy to manage users, disable users, or bypass if needed in case of an emergency. The MFA feature is particularly strong, with an excellent application interface. The dashboards and everything about managing the product is clean and intuitive.

I have not implemented Cisco Duo's end-to-end phishing resistance with capabilities such as proximity verification. I am very happy with Cisco Duo as it is and would not be able to name a feature that could be improved. It was easy to set up and manage, making it an excellent product.

I am uncertain whether Cisco Duo should focus on AI or cost-effectiveness. It is not an expensive product for our company size, and I am unsure what AI could benefit in the solution.

I have been working in my area of expertise for about 12 years.

I have not experienced any downtime with Cisco Duo proxy or the Cisco Duo service in the setup. The only downtime occurs when upgrading the proxy server.

Cisco Duo scales with the growing needs of the company straightforwardly. I have not implemented the other features of Cisco Duo such as Passport, but purchasing more licenses and adding more users is simple.

I have never had to reach out to Cisco Duo's customer service or technical support, so I cannot comment from experience, but I am confident they are competent at what they do.

Prior to adopting Cisco Duo, I was using YubiKey.

Before choosing Cisco Duo, I considered YubiKey. I had been using YubiKey for some time, but when evaluating a platform to perform multi-factor authentication for the organization, I advocated strongly for Cisco Duo because I had been using the Cisco Duo product for a long time for all two-factor authentication needs, and I was already satisfied with the product.

I did not set up YubiKey, so I am not familiar with its technical specifications. YubiKey is a physical key on a keychain that is inserted into a USB port, and they are prone to breaking. Cisco Duo has always been on my mobile phone, making it simple to transfer everything when my phone breaks or I receive a new one.

My experience with deploying Cisco Duo was straightforward, following the documentation. The only issue I encountered was that the documentation was somewhat outdated regarding the file structure of Cisco Duo proxy, but this was not difficult to resolve in a few minutes.

I started the implementation, and then another project took priority, which is why Cisco Duo Directory has not been deployed.

Pricing for Cisco Duo is good, at least for the company size and scale. The setup process was simple. Cisco Duo provides excellent documentation on everything from the proxy and the RADIUS, and how the two should connect. It was a straightforward process, and I was up and running in about one day.

Before choosing Cisco Duo, I considered YubiKey. I had been using YubiKey for some time, but when evaluating a platform to perform multi-factor authentication for the organization, I pushed hard for Cisco Duo because I had been using the Cisco Duo product for a long time for all two-factor authentication needs, and I was already satisfied with the product.

I have tried Cisco Duo Directory to manage user identities, but it has not been deployed yet.

I am not currently using Cisco Identity Intelligence.

I have not noticed any increase in phishing attacks in the company recently.

I would rate Cisco Duo a 10 because it is easy to manage, quick to set up, and offers good value for the price point, contributing to the organization's security. I would recommend going straight with Cisco Duo because it offers probably the best value for the price point, and setup is quick to reach a testing phase.

Cisco Duo has not helped the company reduce overall authentication-related costs, but the organization does gain value from it, even though there is a cost involved.

My main use case for Cisco Duo is providing MFA for all of our users and use cases.

The first focus with Cisco Duo is securing externally available applications, such as SaaS applications. Mostly, we ingest or enforce Cisco Duo via our SSO IDP point because then we do not have to worry about the native integration with whatever application we are trying to secure. If it is SSO capable, we inject Cisco Duo into that.

When it came about, I was a big fan of the risk-based authentication feature of Cisco Duo. That was a big win. Additionally, the Verified Push after the Cisco breach was important, as Cisco recognized that they had to do something about that and they came up with the Verified Push, which is also a very good idea. Nowadays, if I would have known a couple years back what I know today, I would not have worried about that too much because I would have just moved over to passwordless and phishing-resistant MFA means in the first place.

The major improvement I would suggest for Cisco Duo would have been to collaborate with Microsoft more closely and get positioned in a way as a recognized MFA authentication method on Entra. Since Microsoft forced all of their customers to enforce MFA when logging into anything in the Microsoft universe, Cisco Duo was not a recognized way of doing that. It was enforced as an external authentication method, as Microsoft calls it, and it was not a native Cisco Duo integration. Even the external one was not possible to select as a default, so we had to use something else along with it, which for us was Microsoft. That was very annoying.

Cisco Duo did not help reduce the cost of the overall authentication method that we have in our company; instead, it increased, obviously. Cisco Duo was the first technology that we introduced, which had to not just change or implement a certain technology. That was the easy part; the hard part was changing the habits and the culture, getting people to accept what MFA is and to go through the hassle of MFA every single time. The total cost of ownership increased, along with the implementation and the license cost, as well as the reluctance of users to handle IT systems. Security is always a fine balance, where we have to explain to the users what we are doing, why we are doing it, and not overdo it.

Where it lagged behind a lot is in the RDP integration, because we have users, especially in Germany or other jurisdictions, where we cannot force users to use their phone. Therefore, we had to give them some kind of Passkeys, and they are not supported in every use case, or if they are accepted, it is extremely tedious. With standards such as OAuth or FIDO2, that can vastly be improved. Apart from that, it is a very solid MFA solution.

I have been using Cisco Duo for seven or eight years.

Regarding the stability and reliability of Cisco Duo, it is very good. It always does exactly what it is supposed to do, with no downtime over the years that we have had it in use, despite the issues I mentioned with Microsoft, where we were not able to integrate Cisco Duo at all.

Prior to Cisco Duo, I did not use another MFA solution; that was the first one.

I would describe the experience of deploying Cisco Duo as super simple. It was straightforward, one of the easiest consoles I ever had to implement.

I can still say that I have seen a return on investment from Cisco Duo, as having MFA is a basic requirement nowadays. MFA is considered state-of-the-art if you look at things such as GDPR or any other information security framework, so not having MFA means you cannot put a price tag on that because you will be hit with ransomware immediately.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Cisco Duo is that we have it as part of an Enterprise License Agreement, so that is probably not comparable.

Before adopting Cisco Duo, I evaluated a couple of other solutions, but at that time, Cisco Duo won out primarily because it was available as part of the Enterprise License Agreement, and we were a big Cisco shop already.

I am not using Cisco Identity Intelligence.

I have not noticed an increase in phishing attacks recently in my organization because we are pretty well set up in terms of email protection.

I just learned about the Proximity Verification capability with Cisco Duo. We do not have it because we are already using Passkeys, so we no longer need Proximity Verification.

I did not deploy Cisco Duo Directory to manage the user identity.

I would give this review an overall rating of 8.

I use Cisco Duo mainly for RDP sessions as a second factor, so anyone who wants to access the servers can do so with Cisco Duo as an MFA layer.

This is for securing critical infrastructure, not just RDP but SSH as well on non-Windows machines. When someone wants to access critical infrastructure via either SSH or RDP, they use their Active Directory credentials as a first factor, and then they use a second factor using Cisco Duo, predominantly using YubiKey, with the Cisco Duo mobile app as well in some use cases where they don't have YubiKeys.

Otherwise, I use YubiKey TOTP as the second factor.

The way I sync users with Cisco Duo is based on group membership, where I set up the policies, application policies, global policies, and the mobile app versions or version restrictions in Cisco Duo, pulling the information from Entra, my IDP platform. Based on the group I configure in Entra, Cisco Duo pulls the users and groups information from Entra.

I haven't enabled any new features for Cisco Duo recently, but I am continuing with what I had before, using Cisco Duo as an MFA layer by pulling users and groups from Entra, having individual application policies for each application, along with an overarching global policy that protects all the applications.

I am not utilizing passwordless sign-in for Cisco Duo; it's always username and password as a first factor, and Cisco Duo as a second factor.

I do have Entra as the strategic IDP protecting the non-human agents' use cases, but I am not using Cisco Duo for that.

For managing risks for human users and non-human identities, such as AI agents, I am not using Cisco Duo for non-human identities, only for MFA as a second-factor authentication to the workloads.

Regarding capabilities beyond MFA with Cisco Duo, I do utilize device health checks for some use cases, especially for contractors out in the field, but as they migrate to AVD, that feature is being phased out as it's coming in as a native feature in AVD.

Having the MFA feature provided by Cisco Duo, which I was previously lacking, has positively impacted my organization by being helpful.

The measurable improvement I see with Cisco Duo is in the audit findings, where having an MFA layer on RDP or non-RDP and my server access use cases filled a gap for me. I onboarded any critical infrastructure onto Cisco Duo for providing the MFA support.

From a user-friendliness perspective, Cisco Duo is super easy to use and support, and I haven't had issues from a compliance or security audit perspective, where I ticked the mark.

One of the best features Cisco Duo offers is the MFA feature, especially on Windows or non-Windows machines, where, as I mentioned before, that's something I was lacking, and Cisco Duo helped me to have an MFA layer, which came in my Essential Eight security audit and also involves AVD accesses where I use Cisco Duo.

The cool features are the MFA, and it's also very user-friendly.

From an administrative point of view, I find Cisco Duo user-friendly because the console is very easy to use, and when it comes to the Cisco Duo agent installations, the documents are pretty clear. I just share the installation document without keeping any separate documents myself, simply pointing to the Cisco Duo agent installation document for Windows or non-Windows, saying just to follow this and install it. It's super easy, without many issues.

From an admin point of view, the console of Cisco Duo is super easy to use, with no issues around that, including the mobile app.

Signing in with Cisco Duo is not that difficult, as it's user-friendly, and, aside from a few features missing, it's super easy to use from a user perspective. It supports YubiKey for TOTP and the mobile app module, and I haven't had any issues.

Currently, Cisco Duo has a pull capability only, so it would be good to be able to push it from the Entra side. That's one capability that is lacking.

The reason I chose a seven rating for Cisco Duo is that, as I mentioned before, it's not cheap, and one of the key features that comes to mind is its dependency on the internet to make Cisco Duo reachable, which can lead to a failure. If there's no internet, it bypasses Cisco Duo completely, which I feel is a major security flaw, so it could be improved with some alternative options.

I have been using Cisco Duo for probably more than two years or three years, but I've been using it over a year, more than a year, maybe close to two years.

I have had no issues with the stability of Cisco Duo.

There are no issues with the scalability of Cisco Duo either, given that it's a SaaS module that scales vertically by itself.

The customer support for Cisco Duo is perfect; I haven't encountered any issues, and I can reach out to Cisco engineers directly, especially one in Australia, who supports me anytime.

When it comes to return on investment with Cisco Duo, it's mainly on the security side, which can't really be measured.

However, three people manage the Cisco Duo platform, with one person actively handling support tickets and new onboarding.

In terms of pricing, I would say it's not cheap, around 8 or 9 USD per user, and there's no setup cost since it's a SaaS offering, but I do pay the per-user license cost.

By the time I joined, Cisco Duo was already in place, and I just picked it up from where it was.

I would rate Cisco Duo as a seven, acknowledging it's not cheap and that it could be better.

Cisco Duo is deployed in a public cloud as a SaaS offering, so outbound internet connectivity is necessary to access Cisco Duo, and I don't have a proxy installed on-premises.

Cisco Duo is completely managed by Cisco Duo as a SaaS model, and I haven't got an installation myself.

Cisco Duo has not significantly influenced my identity strategy beyond authentication since I am not using anything else, but if I have use cases or full documents, I can have a look.

The advice I would give to others looking into Cisco Duo is that it's super easy to use. The MFA feature is the only feature I use, and it has pretty good documentation for anyone with a use case like mine.

For primary purposes, I am using Cisco Duo as an office gateway and Wi-Fi solution.

My experience with Cisco Duo's strong security authentication system has benefited my organization; it is quite simple. It helps to manage potential threats because there are many things; if you have connected any network equipment and someone has used any third-party equipment, it will alert immediately, detecting many things which are bypassing the network equipment very well.

There is much that is helpful in having a complete passwordless environment with Cisco Duo; previously, we had a lot of password handling and saving, with people forgetting passwords, but now we do not face those problems anymore.

To improve Cisco Duo, we have some third-party hardware, and for integrations with that, we need more user-friendly integrations since third-party integration can present a lot of compatibility issues with legacy products.

In terms of deployment, Cisco Duo requires some improvement.

I have been working with Cisco Duo for the past two to three years.

Stability is one thing, and it is very stable.

We do not have any scalability issues because we only have an alerting system; we do not have any AI integrations at this time.

It takes two months to deploy the product because we have many different locations, almost 15 countries.

I would rate the technical support of Cisco as seven.

For security, we use only Cisco at this time.

Deployment of Cisco Duo was, at the beginning, a little bit tricky with the designing and all the considerations, then after that, it is very convenient to handle.

For a non-prepared, non-technical user, it could be tricky and quite complex. The implementation part is not simple as it requires many things to be taken care of before it is a stable solution.

For the part of the deployment, we hired a third-party vendor who implemented and trained us, and now we are handling that.

It is beneficial in terms of finance to use Cisco Duo with some return on investment and cost reductions in the long run.

It is a little bit expensive, but with security, we cannot compromise on it.

I have not thought of some alternatives or of switching to some other products.

I do make use of advanced identity threat detection and response features.

I am not much of a user, but we have a team to handle those things, which are the advantages of Cisco Duo.

In the past one year, we have not upgraded to any new features.

I am not much aware about Cisco Identity Intelligence, but my team looks at those things; I have very little information on that.

My overall rating for this product is seven.

The primary use cases for Cisco Duo include two-factor authentication from the internet and SSL VPN integration with Cisco Duo.

My experience with Cisco Duo's strong security authentication system has been good; it performs very well when logging in.

I have not used Cisco Duo's conversational AI interface for admin tasks.

My impression of Cisco's Identity Intelligence capability to detect and respond to identity-based risks is that it is good, but the problem is that their reporting is not good compared to Palo Alto and Fortinet; the reporting would be a struggle.

I do not utilize the Advanced Identity Threat Detection and Response feature because we have Cisco IPS, so we are using that instead.

Cisco Duo could be improved by making it available on Microsoft Azure.

I would rate Cisco Duo seven out of ten because of the issues I have already mentioned. The Cisco firewall is a bit slow, and I am uncertain whether they have a mobile pass feature in Cisco Duo.

I think a mobile pass feature should be an alternative option nowadays in case there are any issues in the telecom sector.

I have been working with the product for more than two years.

There are no new features or functionalities in Cisco Duo that my organization has started using recently. We have two-factor authentication with FTD, and as I mentioned, we are moving to the cloud, so we will deploy Cisco Duo on the cloud for our cloud-hosted applications.

I do not think Cisco Duo is the best option on the market thus far.

I used FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Authenticator before Cisco Duo.

I think the pricing of Cisco Duo is acceptable; we know how to reduce the cost.

The choice depends on how the data centers are moving. If they are completely moved to the cloud, then we will use Microsoft.

I have experience with Cisco Duo. I have been quite satisfied with Cisco Duo. The implementation of Cisco Duo is straightforward. I am a customer of Cisco. I would rate this product seven out of ten overall.

My main use cases for Cisco Duo are to protect the jump hosts as a two-factor authentication method for logging in. A password is provided to the jump host and then every time I log in to that jump host, I get a Cisco Duo push request to my phone. We have approximately 200 users of our jump host, and there are another four jump hosts that I regularly log into that are also using Cisco Duo for two-factor authentication.

The benefits I have realized from using Cisco Duo include having an easy-to-use two-factor, single sign-on option. We definitely need more security, and it seems to be the least friction-creating way to implement it. That is probably the main benefit.

The features of Cisco Duo that I appreciate the most include its easy interface and the speed of using your thumbprint, which makes it much faster than having to type in a passcode every time. Microsoft Authenticator is probably the solution that comes to mind where the amount of times you have to type in a passcode and provide a number and provide another authentication factor just to achieve the same thing that Cisco Duo accomplishes with one thumbprint immediately. There is a significant difference there. We did not replace Authenticator with Cisco Duo. We have Authenticator in other places and Cisco Duo in some places, so I would say Cisco Duo is faster and much easier to use.

In terms of the adaptive authentication feature, Cisco Duo has helped secure user access by adding another layer into the whole process. Instead of just having a passcode that gets rotated every few weeks, I have that passcode and Cisco Duo, which is tied to my phone number. This provides another layer of security.

Cisco Duo's trusted endpoint device capabilities have helped improve our security policies by running on our jump host alongside a number of security software. Cisco Duo is one of them and makes up the whole stack of security so I can trust these endpoints are protected. It is very difficult for Cisco Duo to be hijacked given that it is tied to a phone number and tied to an application on the handset. There is a lot of trust there.

I assess the effectiveness of Cisco Duo's single sign-on on reducing login complexities for our users by comparing it to competitors. The way that Cisco Duo is integrated with its single sign-on is much better than Microsoft Authenticator. It seems more streamlined. Being able to just use a thumbprint makes it very fast. Sometimes with Microsoft, I find that I have to type it in once and then have to type it in again and again, whereas I have never had to repeat a push request to get something working. If I did, it would usually be due to the server rather than Cisco Duo itself.

The implementation of two-factor authentication, specifically with Cisco Duo, has slowed down the ability to log into a jump host, changing it from what was previously about a five-second process to approximately 15 to 20 seconds. Where there is slowness, it is probably more on the network side than it is on Cisco Duo's side. The Red Hat servers seem to be somewhat slow at passing that request on at times.

Cisco Duo could be better by processing multiple Cisco Duo requests. Typically, when I am doing Cisco Duo requests, I might be logging into a few different things. It would be nice if the app is still open and I have done one request, if it will process the rest automatically. It might reduce authentication times from 15 seconds to completing the first request in 15 seconds, and then the next few in five seconds. That is probably the main area for improvement.

I implemented Cisco Duo approximately a year and a half ago, which has greatly enhanced our security processes since adoption.

Before using Cisco Duo, I used Microsoft Authenticator and SecureAll. They are all slower. We still have them in other parts of the company and they are used for other things. Microsoft Authenticator is integrated with the Office 365 stack, so there are not really many ways around that. It is still there, but I would say if it was all Cisco Duo, it would probably be a lot easier than it currently is.

I would describe my experience with deploying Cisco Duo, along with my colleague who is also doing the survey, as pretty easy. We did the integration with the jump host servers. It seemed that we just had to point, using Linux CLI, toward some servers based in Australia, and all of the integration seemed to be pretty frictionless. The main friction came from the Cisco Duo team within my company who were managing Cisco Duo. We were largely the guinea pigs for it, and so they did not know what they were doing with the integration. All of our steps were quite easy, but getting them to those steps seemed quite difficult. I would put that down to lack of experience within my company rather than Cisco Duo.

Regarding whether I have seen a return on investment from using Cisco Duo, I do not do the financials, so I cannot comment, but I would imagine it is probably a pretty cost-effective way to have delivered it.

I would rate Cisco Duo a nine out of ten overall because I think it could definitely improve. There are ways to speed it up, so it cannot get a perfect score, but it is probably the best solution for two-factor single sign-on that we currently have, so I am happy to use it.

My advice for someone who is researching or implementing Cisco Duo based on my experience would be to take a look at the various solutions, how long they take to deploy, how easy they are, and the end-user experience, which ones create the most headaches. I believe Cisco Duo will come out on top.